Yehowah Vowel Points for YHWH Aleppo Codex 3
Papers, Religion

Un Nome eccellente, by Gérard Gertoux

Reprinted and Translated from Un Nome eccellente, by Gérard Gertoux

My first work entitled YHWH – Un nome eccellente. Narrazione storica del Nome divino [YHWH in fame only? A historical record of the divine Name], was cataloged by Henri Cazelles, chairman of the board of the Institut Catholique de Paris, as a thesis (T594GER) to BOSEB. The Bible translator French André Chouraqui has mentioned in his book Moses (p. 161). I then published my book entitled Una storia del nome divino. Un Nome eccellente. Currently I am finishing the English version, for publishing soon.

My analysis showed that Geova (i.e. Yehowah in Hebrew) is the exact pronunciation. would agree that this result may seem strange to the reader, but I’m sure they will understand the enormous consequences of such a claim. To give an idea of the importance of this issue present some arguments.

Yahweh or Jehovah (Hebrew: Yehowah)?

1 – Period of discovery (1200-1500) .

Ancient Hebrew scholars, such as Joachim of Fiore (1195) and Pope Innocent III (1200), attempted to vocalize the name of God used the name IEUE. Why this vocalization? The origin is to be found in the book of the famous Maimonides, written in 1190, entitled Guide for the Perplexed where I explain ‘that the Tetragrammaton was the true name of God and say’ that was only true form of worship that had been lost, not the true pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton, because this was still possible, according to his letters (for a better understanding of this term, see the Appendix). This is why Pope Innocent III known ‘that the Hebrew letters of the Tetragrammaton Iohdh, He’, Wav (ie, Y, H, W) were used as vowels, and that the name Iesus had exactly the same vowels I, E and U of the divine name IEUE. He used ‘correspondence Hebrew / Greek between: Y = I, H = E and W = U (In the first century, Josephus explain’ that the Tetragrammaton was written with four vowels .) In addition, the French translator Jacques Lefèvre d ‘ Étaples, obtained the name IHEUHE, because preferred ‘matches for use Hebrew / Latin: Y = I, H = HE = U and W in his notes on the Psalms written in 1509. However, Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa explain ‘in one of his sermons written in 1445, that the name of God is spelled in Hebrew Iohdh, He ‘, Waw, He’ , and that these four letters are vowels, matching I, AND, OR, in greek, because in this language, there is no specific letter for the sound OU (the greek letter U is pronounced like the French Ü). So ‘in greek transcription IEOUA would be more’ accurate and better reflect the sound of the Hebrew name Ieoua OU, which becomes in Latin Iehova or Ihehova, because the letter H is deaf and serves as a consonant vowel U (V). The best match would be Y = I, H = A (end of word) and W = O, as explained by the author in his book Jewish Judah Hallevi The Kuzari written in 1140. This is why the contemporary scholar Antoine Fabre d’Olivet said in his work entitled La Langue hébraïque restituée (The Hebrew language returned) published in 1823, that the best pronunciation of the divine name, according to his letters was Ihôah / Iôhah / Jhôah. Also, when I start ‘to translate the Bible (Genesis, chapters I to X), he used’ systematically IHÔAH name in his translation (ie YHWH = IH-Ô-AH.) Many scholars preferred matches Y = I , H = A (end of word) and W = OU, OU because the sound is more ‘old sound Ô, such as the name is read YHWDH IH-OU-D-AH, not IH-Ô-D-AH . They obtained IH-OU-AH or IOUA because the letter H is deaf. Strangely, many scholars believed that this name was preserved in the ancient JOVA name JOVE (Joue-pater ie Jupiter).

2 – Improvements (1500-1600).

To order the pronunciation variants of the Tetragrammaton, Peter Galatino dedicate ‘a good part of his work entitled De Arcanis catholice Veritatis (The Secret of the Universal Truth), published in 1518, in order to explain the reasons for this decision. First, I quote ‘the book of Maimonides Guide for the Perplexed in large measure, especially chapters 60-64 of the first part, in order to remember that the Tetragrammaton is the proper name of God and that can ‘be pronounced according to his letters. However he prove ‘that the ruling Ioua, used in his time, it was too rough and they explain’ reasons. Explain ‘such that the name Iuda, written hdwy (YWDH), was an abbreviation of the name Iehuda written hdwhy (YHWDH). All Jewish names starting with YHW-[ why ] are almost always voiced-IEH. Therefore, if the Tetragrammaton was really pronounced Ioua was written hW: y (YWH) in Hebrew, which has never been done. So ‘as the Tetragrammaton is writtenhwhy (YHWH), the letter H in the name must be audible. He concluded that, having to pronounce the name according to its letters, the better transcription should be I-eh-ou-a (Iehoua), rather than form I-ou-used in, for example, by Agostino Giustiniani, in his translation multilingual Psalms published in 1516 (if he Galatino transcribed directly form masoretica, would get Yehouah and not Iehoua). The French translator Pierre Robert Olivetan recognized in his Apologie du Translateur (Apology of the translator) written in 1535, that the Name of God was Iehouah Ioua rather than in Hebrew, because the latter form did not express the aspiration of the letter H.

Following the well-known expert in grammar W. Gesenius recognized according to the names teoforici (see Appendix) that the name of God could easily be vocalized in Iehouah. However, the overt form Iehouah was attacked very early because of the Cabalists and then the theologians who supposed that the divine name was a verbal form . This statement is absurd because if the divine name was a verbal Moses, who spoke Hebrew, he would have understood the meaning without any problem, which did not happen (Ex 3:13). In fact, Moses knew the name of God, but he received a religious understanding of the meaning “He will [or will to be]” ( yihyeh ) is not a grammatical explanation. For more ‘normal way to ask for a name is the use of the pronoun Hebrew I ( YMI as in Judges 13:17), the use of mah (hm; ) instead requires a further response, and question the meaning (‘ what? ‘ ) or the composition of the name. So the answer “I’ll ‘[‘ll show’ to be] what ‘that I will’ [‘ll show ‘to be]” is more’ a religious explanation that a note grammar!

Known as Michael Servetus’ in his treatise against the trinity De Trinitatis erroribus (errors Trinity) written in 1531, the name is very close to Iehouah theophoric name Jesus being Iesua in Hebrew. This link seem ‘to him more’ convincing grammatical form proposed by some kabbalists of his time – a future piel (speak YeHaWèH meaning “He will be”, “He will be” or “He will be.”) For example, the Jewish yehabe had been used by Abner of Burgos, a Spanish jew converted, in his work entitled Mostrador de Justicia (1330). Servetus defended the name Iehouah against the supposed grammatical form (future piel !) yehauue spiegand that “He will generate” in the book entitled The epistle of the secrets of the Christian Kabbalist Paulus de Heredia, published around 1488.

3 – Controversy (1600-1900).

The debate as to whether or Ioua Iehoua use was restricted to groups of Hebraists. However, when the victorious form began ‘to reach the general public, the discussion changed’ genre to become much more ‘ theological controversy . The first to open hostilities hostilità was Archbishop Gilbert Génebrard, in his book written in 1568 in defense of the Trinity, in whom I dedicate ‘many pages to prove the errors of S. Chateillon, P. Galatino, S. Pagnin, etc. In the first place, attack ‘the shape Ioua used by Chateillon recalling that S. Augustine had explained that according to the writer Varro Jews worshiped Ioue (Jupiter, Jove), and therefore the use of Ioua was a return to paganism. In the preface to his commentary on the Psalms I point ‘also that this name was Ioua barbarian, fictitious and atheist! With regard to the testimony of Clement of Alexandria (Iaou), Jerome (Iaho), Theodoret (Iabe), reason ‘that it was altered fome of Ioue, and apparently these witnesses appeared to him as little trust as very late having Jews ceased to pronounce the name for centuries. Finally reproach ‘P. Galatino (and S. Pagnin), who had used the form Iehoua, not having considered the theological sense: “He is” in order to find lavera vocalization . In fact, since the translation of the Septuagint, it was known that the divine name means “He is.” Génebrard try ‘to confirm this definition according to his knowledge of Hebrew. So ‘since God is indicated in Exodus 3:14 with the phrase “I am” (in Hebrew ehie ), you should say, in speaking of God, “He is,” meaning in Hebrew Iihie (a form of qal the future). Because of language laws, it was likely that this form Iihie came from a most ‘archaic Iehue suggested in 1550 by Louis Lippomano, and Génebrard known ‘that the abbot Joachim of Fiore had used this most’ exact (Ieue) in its Book of Revelation.

The proof of Génebrard, albeit unconvincingly, made a great impression on his level of culture. In addition, during the next century, biblical commentators often cited this form Iehue (or Iiheue) next to Iehoua. In any case, if you ignore the glaring aspects of the demonstration, this remained highly speculative because of the absence of evidence (on the back, in order to mitigate this shortcoming, the Protestant theologians rehabilitated historical evidence of the first century). The main innovation of Génebrard was to introduce the theological significance of the name in the search of his vocalization (which actually was a Kabbalistic concept) , a process that gave rise to (while increased the knowledge of the Hebrew language and its history) to a profusion of new forms of vocalization.

4 – Period of confusion (1900-2000).

To sum up the problem, the pronunciation of God’s name, that is Yehowah, is easy to find using the theophoric names because without exception, all the theophoric names beginning in YHW- are vocalized YeHÔ- (IÔ- in the Septuagint). Therefore the ultimate theophoric name that is to say YHW-H must be read as YeHÔ-AH. The meaning of God’s name is also easy to determine, that is “He will [prove to] be” according to Exodus 3:14, which gives the correct insight. To suppose an additional insight from the Cabal (“He will make to be”), Hebrew grammar (“He causes to become”) or Greek philosophy (“He is, He exists”) introduced serious confusion.

The vital key to avoid confusion is to note that there are not equivalencies between the religious etymologies in the Bible and the hypothetical grammatical etymologies.

Rest Nuah Noah Naham Comfort (1Ch 4:19)
He will be laud Yudeh (?) Yehudah Yodeh He will laud”
He will [prove to] be Yihweh (?) Yehowah Yihyeh He will [prove to] be
(?) Abraham Abhamon Father of a crowd

For example, the famous name Yehudah means “He will laud” according to Genesis 29:35, but not according to Hebrew grammar (Yodeh). Thus, despite the biblical explanation, Yehudah is a name and not a verbal form. Not understanding these differences, many scholars and translators have tried to harmonize grammatical etymologies and biblical etymologies. For example, one of the translators of the Septuagint modified the biblical etymology “He will comfort” (Ge 5:29) into a better grammatical etymology “He will rest”. In the same way, the Jewish writer, Philo, modified the biblical etymology “Father of a crowd” (Ge 17:5) into a better grammatical etymology “[chosen] father of noise” (De mutatione Nominum §66) that is Abra‘am in Hebrew which harmonizes betterwith the name Abraham than Abhamon. In the past, many scholars tried to modify the biblical etymology “He will [prove to] be” into a better grammatical etymology “He causes to become”, because this last form (hypothetically vocalized Yahayeh which can hypothetically be derived from an ancient Yahaweh) could explained the frequent beginning in Yah- of the Greek testimonies in Iaô of the first century.

“He Causes to Become” (Yahweh) or “He will be” (Yehowah)?

  1. The note on Exodus 3:14 The Jerusalem Bible (Paris 1986 Éd. Cerf p. 87 note k) acknowledges that “at present the causative form “He causes to be” is an old explanation, but it is more probably a qal form, that is “He is.”” According to the competent Hebrew scholar André Caquot, the name Yahweh or Iaoue is a theological rather than a philological form of God’s name. (Les énigmes d’un hémistiche biblique in: Dieu et l’être. 1978 Paris Ed. Études Augustiniennes C.N.R.S. p. 24 note 23).
  2. In Exodus 3:14 the Hebrew Bible uses a form qal “I shall [prove to] be what I shall [prove to] be” and not a form hiphil “I cause to become what I cause to become.”
  3. Here is the answer of Professor Freedman to a previous letter in which I asked for an explanation about this amazing explanation. He writes: ”

    I was pleased to hear from him and receive his detailed discussion of this valuable and interesting topic, about which I have written from time to time. ‘ve never been completely satisfied with my analysis and interpretation of the divine name in the Hebrew Bible, nor that of others, including my teacher, WF Albright and his master (which Albright has derived its location), Paul Haupt. At the same time, I have not seen anything that would convince me of the superior value of another interpretation, but I will be ‘pleased to learn from his office and find out that you have finally solved questoantico puzzle.

    In spite of the reputation of the famous Professor Freedman as publisher, I would say that these arguments are without force. For example, he said, “However, the name could be a single use or singular root causative.” This cannot be taken seriously because there is no evidence, because the causative form of the verb “to become, to be” does not exist in Hebrew and it has never existed. Whereas, the dogma of the causative form “He Causes to Become” is not found in the Bible.

Furthermore ‘Professor Freedman chose this analysis not for grammatical reasons but theological (Read the comment in its’ Anchor Bible Dictionary .) So the name Yahweh “He Causes to Become” is a theological choice against Yehowah, that I say ‘” He will [display to be]. ” For example, to demonstrate the causative form Professor Albright (who was a teacher of Professor Freedman!), Suppose that you could find the real name through the names from the false religions (such as the Babylonian and Egyptian), as he writes in his book From the Stone Age to Christianity (from the Stone Age to Christianity).Suppose also that the formula of Exodus 3:14 was modified not to contradict the first hypothesis. In saying, Professor Albright edit ‘the biblical formula.

The theory of Professor Freedman is supported only by a small group of students (the teacher of Freedman and a few others) but is not based on reliable analysis. Even in 1906, the dictionary Brown, Driver and Briggs said: “Many contemporary scholars explain hw, h] y ‘ as Hiph. of HWH (…) But the majority interpret it as a Qal of HWH . “To date competent scholars (for example, L. Pirot, A. Clamer Bible Ed Letouzey et Ané, 1956, p. 83) do not know the causative form can ‘be taken thoughtlessness for two main reasons. Primarily the causative form of the verb “to be” is known in Hebrew, also to express a causative sense, was used as the Piel. Secondly, this philosophical notion was not Hebrew (but from Greek philosophy) and the sense more ‘natural’ I’m ‘with you, “according to Exodus 3:12.

It seems that the position taken by some committees translation has the support of scholars and is in complete agreement with the Jewish concept of the Almighty who is the First Cause of the universe, however, appears to be a confusion between philosophy and grammar. In addition, this “Jewish concept” is above all a “philosophical concept greek”. The translators of the Settantafecero a similar error, changing the meaning of Exodus 3:14 “I’ll ‘[‘ll show’ to be] that I’ll be ‘[‘ll show’ to be]” to “I am He who is.”

EJ Revell Professor Emeritus at the University of Toronto, in reply to my letter, he wrote: ” I read with great interest the copy of his work sent to me. Before reading his study had no particular opinion about the pronunciation of the name of God, as a student in the 50s, I was told that scientists had determined that “Yahweh” was the exact pronunciation. I found that the argument was well demonstrated, but this view was stated almost as a dogma of faith by my instructors , and I had no issue of greater importance in opposition, so ‘ignored the problem. I have occasionally thought, but I did not get any further information than what you mentioned in your studio. You have to harvest some more information about the problem than any other student I know, and you deserve the compliments for the production of a work of value. Many thanks for letting me posted. “

The following is an appendix with some further explanation in order to avoid confusion between the name and its meaning, and the two names: Jah and Jehovah.

1) Confusion between the abbreviated name of YH and the great name YHWH.

The reading-Ya is favored by a confusion between the two names of God: the full name YeHoWaH (Ps 83:18) and the abbreviated name YaH (Ps 68:4). Jews riservarono treated differently to these two names because they are always agreed in pronouncing the abbreviated name, but opposed to the full, which was replaced around the third century BC by his substitute Adonai (Lord). So ‘the abbreviated name Yah is in the Writings Greek Christians in the expression Hallelujah (Rev. 19:1-6), which means “Praise Yah.” Also in the writings of Qumran ‘, the Tetragrammaton was sometimes written in paleo-Hebrew in the Hebrew text, which is not true for the name Yah. It should also be noted that the name Yah was specifically used in songs (Ex 15:2) and in the psalms.

– The abbreviated name is vocalized YH Yah (Hallelu- Yah in Hebrew and Allelou- ia in greek).

– The nickname YHW alone (not in the Bible, but found in the writings of Elephantina for example) Yahu is vocalized Hebrew and lao ( IAW ) in greek (found in a copy of the seventies of the first century BC). This same Yahu means in Hebrew “He Yah” (Yah Hu ‘). The name Yahu is different from the name Jehu ( Ye Hu in Hebrew and Ie ou in the Septuagint) meaning Yehow [ah-h] û ‘ie “Yehow [ah] He” and not Yah-hu’ ie “He Yah” (in which case the seventies would keep the shape Iaou instead of Ieou).

In addition to the initial yeho-which was shortened to yo-, the end -yah also had a diminutive -yahu , and the latter means “Yah same.” This item appeared for two reasons. First, the Hebrew word hu ‘which means “himself” (implied God) began ‘to acquire great importance in worship. For example, to distinguish it from the others and to mark its duration, God is often expressed using the Hebrew expression ‘ani hu’ , which means’ myself ‘or more’ exactly ‘I, himself “or” It’ s the Me. ” (Dt 32:39; Isaiah 52:6, etc..) Although humans also can use the same expression talking about themselves (1Ch 21:17), usually when someone using “he” or “he himself” was to indicate God (2 Kings 2:14)

Jews have been slow to integrate this divine name in their names, as in the case of the following names Abihu ‘(my father [is] He), Elihu’ (my God [is] He) or Yehu ‘(Ye [Huah is ] Him). Most ‘late changes being the final letter of the names, this was not the most’ writing. For example, the name Elihu ‘is written very often Elihu. The names Abiyah (my father [is] Yah), and Eliyah (my God [is] Yah) were also used, and there was a mixture of Yah and Hu ‘to get names like Abiyahu’ (my father [is ] Yah same), or Eliyahu ‘(my God [is] Yah same).

This association provoke ‘the use of a new divine name, which is not found in the Bible, with the exception of the period of a few names teoforici: the name Yah hu’, abbreviated to Yahu. The similarity of this expression with the Tetragrammaton undoubtedly favors’ the emergence of this expression. For more ‘you can’ find this name alone (YHW), written by the Tetragrammaton (YHWH), in the writings of Kuntillet Ajrud, dated 9 sec. AC. Some specialists argue that the final U might be a remnant of an archaic name. However, this would be a single event. Moreover, this explanation is really unconvincing since it does not apply to the name of Elihu.

– The full name YHWH is vocalized Hebrew Yehowah Iôa and the beginning of many Greek names. Similarly, as there were many names teoforici processed by the full name, ie names beginning in yeho-and in its shortened form Y (eh) ô-there were also names teoforici processed by Yah. However, we need a big explanation in the Bible, Greek or Hebrew. The Jews were worried to begin their names in yeho-o-yo, or their names end in-yah, but never the other way, without exception . So ‘is not found in the Bible, among the hundreds of existing teoforici names, one name that begins with-Yah. So ‘those who vocalized Yahweh in Yahweh are obliged to admit that the Tetragrammaton, theophoric name par excellence, does not belong to the class of names teoforici, that would really be the most ridiculous. This lack of reason becomes clear when you open a dictionary, and the name Yahweh is isolated from all other names teoforici: Joshua (Joshua), Jonathan (Jonathan), Jesus (Jesus’), John (John), etc.. For example, the name YHW H NN (John, John) is vocalized yeho h a-nan-nan in Hebrew and IOA in greek. For example Severus of Antioch (465-538) wrote in his comments to John chapter 8 that the Hebrew name of God is IOA ( IWA ). In addition, this name IOA ( IWA ) is located in the sixth century in Codex Coilinianus.

E ‘can also verify that, without exception , the names teoforici begin in YHW-and vocalized yeho-(I-in the Septuagint), and those ending in-YHW are vocalized-Yahu (IA or IOU in the Septuagint). In addition, the vowel in very often follows the sequence-yeho, namely the “normal” sequence is yeho-() a. This sequence is so ‘universal names teoforici that some names were “teoforicizzati” assonance in the following cases of the Septuagint: IOA-tam (Judges 9:7, 57; 2 Kings 15:5, 32), IOA-Keim (1 Chr 4 : 22), IOA-s (1 Chr 23:10,11), IOA-sar (1 Chr 2:18), IOA- k to (Jer 37:3), etc.. To sum up, the name Yehu ‘is derived from a contraction of YeHoWaH Hu’ to YeHoW-[aH]-u ‘. On the other hand Yahu is a contraction of the two names YaH-Hu ‘.

2) No bond “obvious” YH between the abbreviated name and the full name of YHWH.

The vocalization of the abbreviated name Yah YH proves nothing about the vocalization of the name. For example, Betty and Liz are abbreviated versions of Elisabeth, but the link between the abbreviated versions and the full name is not at all obvious. In any case, there are only four combinations for all the names teoforici.


He gave

2Sa 7:2


He gave – Yah

1Cr 25:2

Natan Yahu-

He gave – Yah same

Jer 36:14


Yeho [wah] – gave

1Sa 14:6


Y (eh) ô [wah] – gave

1Sa 14:1

3) The loss of the first vowel does not apply to the full name YHWH.

If the names were still pronounced Yaho teoforici-(in Hebrew) at the beginning of 3 ° century before our era, the translators of the Septuagint should preserve these names, such as lao-because in general kept the first vowel of proper names ( Zacharias, Nethaniah, Cahath, instead of Zeccaria, Netania, Cehath, etc.). Now among the thousands of names in the Bible teoforici Greek, it is not found even one that stays with lao-(or even with Ia-). This should have succere frequently if these names were started with Yahow-(or Yaw-). For example, all the names “teoforici” the god Nabu (beginning in Nebu-in Hebrew) are written Nabou-in the Septuagint. So ‘initials IO names teoforici provide evidence of vocalization Y (yes) or not-and Y (h) o-.

In this way, suppose that all the names teoforici in Hebrew vocalized today yeho-were derived from a form “archaic” of Yahu-is untenable from a point of view of linguistic laws. On the other hand, the fusion of the group ua in a simple u is often observed and especially in the middle of a word.




Hebrew form



Majesty of God

Ga ‘(a) w (h) -‘ and

Nb 13:15



Mitsw (ah)-OT

Nb 15:22


Contend, God

Yisra (h) ‘and

Gen 32:28


Gods / God

‘Elo (a) h-im

2K 1:12


So ‘the name Ga’aw (h)’ and became Ga’ow’el that Ga’û’el then Ge’û’el. More ‘general contractions occurred teoforici names. For example Yehowah-nathan became Yehow (ah) nathan ie Yehônathan, and in some cases there was a double contraction as in Yehowah-‘and which became Y (h) w (h)’ and that Yô’el, and similarly Ga ‘ (a) w (h) ‘and became Ga’û’el (then Ge’û’el) or Mitsw (h) ot became Mitswot.The name Zeru (‘a) babel which means “seed of Babel’ step ‘in Hebrew Zerubabel.

To date, the name theophoric possibly more ‘old and yo h anan (yw h nn), written and dated paleoebraico 11 ° century BC. In any case the influence of the name Yahu is so ‘powerful that the name yo hanan is spent bed Yaw h anan. There is also a habit to vocalize Ya-all the names earlier, because of a belief that all Semitic names seguissere a general evolution in Ya> Yi> Ye, according to a relatively well-tested language law (the law of Barth- Ginsberg). Note, however, that this law is often applied double-sided, ie Ye <Yi <Ya, which is manifestly false. For example, the name should be spelled Yisra’el Ia-a -ra-on today, but at Ebla, in documents dating from the third millennium BC, was found the name I -ra-on, that is the exact equivalent Yisrael. In fact, some studies showed that some verb forms and names could be vocalized Yi-Ya-rather than in Ebla. In addition, in the writings of Mari, dating from the same period, the specialists have come to the same conclusions regarding the vocalization Yi-Ya-rather than, in many cases. For example, the name I-krub (He bless’) is written very often Ia-krub. So ‘looking at the texts of the most’ ancient known to us, this law (Ya> Yi> Ye) has many exceptions.

Many linguists have postulated that although this name was pronounced Yehowah in the first century, was the result of an “archaic” or Yahowah Yahwoh with the classic fall of the initial vowel (because of the accent), that became the first syllable Ya- Ye-. Now if this change is well demonstrated in the case of many names (although the influence of the Aramaic language of the Jewish can ‘explain this change as well), there is no trace of this phenomenon in the case of the divine name. For example, the modern names Zekaryah, Nethanyah, Sedom, etc., Should be pronounced Zakaryah, Nathanyah, Saduma, “ancient times”, because the Septuagint held earlier forms with the initial vowel (Zakaria, Nathania, Sodom, etc. .). I keep ‘so many traces of this process occurred in 3 ° century BC. If according to the hypothesis of linguists mentioned above, the names were still pronounced Yaho teoforici-(in Hebrew) at the beginning of 3 ° century BC, the translators of the LXX would have to keep these names in-lao. Now from thousands of names teoforici in the Greek Bible (or Jewish), not only if it finds one that has remained lao-or even one-Ia. The language laws do not explain why the Septuagint did not keep track of this lao-term, it would certainly have to be widespread if the name had been Yahwoh.

It is also proposed a second explanation: there was a lao name transformation for theological reasons (namely the protection of God’s Name). This second statement, which is based on a fact finding, is also refuted. If in fact the Tetragrammaton was pronounced Yahwoh (shape Yahowah èassurda, because it means in Hebrew “Yah [is] Howah”, ie ‘disaster’), full name (which is amazing in itself) would be built at the beginning of teoforici names, and all these names would become Yaho-I-(known forms in the LXX with a few exceptions such as IE-Zikar, IE-zébouth [2 K 12:21] IE-soué [1Ch 7:27];-Jarib [1Ch 24:7]). This transformation is illogical, because when they were changed in the final-Yahu, we note that the final choice was split between E-ia-iou, and now the transformation in lao-I-was unanimous (which is in itself hard to believe, because even when the Christian copyists changed the divine name with the title “Lord” some preferred the title “God”) and in disagreement with the previous choice of the final as-ia names teoforici (this choice theological ia-was the most ‘logical maintained because the short form (Yah) of the divine name). Not only the vocalization of these names is really hypothetical, but also their meaning, that of their etymologies, reflects more ‘closely the beliefs of modern experts, more’ tangible evidence. This is certainly true, in spite of the philosophical justifications advanced in some cases.

The explanation more ‘reasonable’ s so to consider that the greek word IO arises simply from a Hebrew form Y (h) o-.

4) What exactly does “read the name according to his letters?”

To combat cabalistic influences Maimonides, the famous Talmudic scholar and jew, I make ‘a complete redefinition of Judaism. The centerpiece of his argument was the name of God, the Tetragrammaton, which was explained in his book entitled Guide for the Perplexed , written in 1190, when he exhibited the following powerful reasoning; Maimonides known ‘that the God of the philosophers BDo require any worship because it is impossible to establish a relationship with a nameless God (Elohim), then prove ‘that the Tetragrammaton YHWH is the personal name of God, that is to say the name read separately (Shem hamephorash), which is different from all the other names such as: Adonay , Shadday, Elohim (these are simply divine titles with an etymology) and others, because the Tetragrammaton has no etymology. Tuttaiva Maimonides knew the problem of pronunciation, because the Jewish tradition stated that it had been lost. On the other hand, he also knew that some Jews believed in magic influence of letters or a precise pronunciation of the divine names, but inform ‘the reader about these practices and calling them crazy inventions. The most ‘remarkable of this statement lies in the way that I reason’ to avoid controversy about a subject so ‘delicate. He stated ‘that he was in fact only true worship that had been lost, and not the true pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton, because it was always possible, according to his letters . In support of this basic idea (that the real worship is more ‘important pronunciation), he quote’ Sota 38th to prove that this name is the essence of God, and that is the reason not to abuse it, and I quote ‘ Zechariah 14:9 to prove the uniqueness of the name, and also Numbers 6:23-27 to show that the priests were obliged to bless through this unique name.

Then, to prove that the pronunciation of the name is not created problems in the past, and did not contain any magical aspect, and I quote ‘in principle Kiddouchin 71a, to say that this name was transmitted by the rabbis to their children. Furthermore, according to Yoma 39b this ruling was widely used before the priesthood of Simon the Just, which shows the inconsistency of magic concepts, because in those days if the name was used had no supernatural aspect, with the exception of the spiritual. Maimonides insisted that what ‘that was necessary was to find the spirituality connected to this name, and not the exact pronunciation. To demonstrate this very important concept to understand the meaning and the sound transmitted by this name, and I quote ‘a relevant example. Certainly in Exodus 6:3 the text indicates that before Moses, the name was not known, that is to say the exact meaning of the name, and not announce it, because who could reasonably believe that a good decision was suddenly able to incite the Israelites to action, unless you suppose magical action of this name, which is in contradiction with the continuation of the events? To conclude this demonstration I quote Maimonides’ Exodus 3:14 to show that the expression Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh that can ‘be well translated “I will be’ what ‘that I will’,” is above all a spiritual teaching. Since the Tetragrammaton had no etymology (linguistic), this connection with the verb “to be (haya)” mainly expressed reasoning “etymological”, ie a teaching about God, which can ‘be defined as “Being which stands happening “or” being necessary. “

It ‘s interesting to note that Judah Hallevi, another Jewish scholar, I present’ practically the same arguments in his book The Kuzari published a few years earlier, in 1140. He wrote that the main difference between the God of Abraham and the God of Aristoteke was the Tetragrammaton (Kuzari IV: 16). He prove ‘also that this was God’s personal name (ibid. IV: 1), which means “he will be with you.” To further demonstrate that it was the meaning of this name that was important and not its pronunciation, he quote ‘Exodus 5:2 where Pharaoh demanded to know his name: not his decision, which he used, but rather’ the authority of Name this (ibid. IV: 15). He prove ‘that the letters of the Tetragrammaton finally have the remarkable property of being matres lectionis , ie the vowels are associated with other consonants, as the spirit is associated with the body and makes it live (ibid. IV: 3).

They provided versions of these two scholars so ‘converged represented a turning point in the history of the name. However, the expression “pronounced according to his letters” as a reminder ‘Maimonides (vowel letters as explained Judah Hallevi) is strictly correct only in the Hebrew language. Joachim made a Greek transliteration of the Tetragrammaton (IEUE) in his work entitled Expositio in Apocalypsimthat complete ‘in 1195. He, too, use ‘the term “Adonay IEUE Tetragrammatonaton nomen” in his other book entitled Liber Figurarum . Joachim ovens ‘three other names: IE, EV, EV, which I associate with’ the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit!

The vocalization of the ‘Tetragrammaton (IEUE) connected to the name of Jesus’ (EU) was going to be improved by Pope Innocent III in one of his sermons written around 1200. He noted ‘that the Hebrew letters of the Tetragrammaton Ioth, Eth, Vau (ie, Y, H, W) were used as vowels, and then the name Iesus had exactly the same vowels I, E and U of the divine name. As Joachim of Fiore, he decomposed the divine name IEUE in IE-EU-EU, which allowed him ‘to suppose that the name SUS IE-IE contains the name of God. Present ‘a parallel between the name written IEVE but pronounced Adonai and the name written IHS but pronounced Iesus. The linking between these two words will play a decisive role in the process of vocalization of the Tetragrammaton.

In the following years the knowledge of Hebrew progressed ‘strongly, including in particular the role of matres lectionis . For example, the famous scholar Roger Bacon (1220-1292) wrote in his grammar of Hebrew in Hebrew there are six vowels (aleph, he, vav, Heth, iod, ain) which approach to use the Masoretic vowels specks. The French scholar Fabre d’Olivet explain ‘himself in his grammar of Hebrew, the following equivalence: aleph = â, h = is = heth is, waw = ô / u, yod = î, aïn = wo. He stated, ‘in his work La Langue hébraïque restituée (Language ebraice returned) published in 1823, that the best pronunciation of the name divinosecondo his letters was Ihôah / Iôhah / Jhôah. For more ‘when I start’ to translate the Bible (Genesis, chapters I to X), he use ‘systematically IHÔAH name in his translation. Antoine Fabre d’Olivet, famous polyglot, knew many oriental languages, which the port ‘in favor of the philological choice (rather than theological) that is refused’ to mix the sound with the Sendo of the word. In addition Judah Hallevi had already clarified in his work that the yod (Y) served as a vowel I, the waw (W) by O, and that h (H) and aleph (‘) served by A. According to these rudimentary directions, you could read about the name YHWH “according to his letters,” as IHOA (because the letter H is never used as a vowel in the middle of words, the exceptional case that you prefer to use the letter Aleph. ) For example, the name YH is pronounced according to his letters IA in Hebrew, Latin and IH IE in greek.

Josephus (37-100), who knew very well the priesthood of this time, clear ‘that when the Romans attacked the temple Jews invoked the ominous name of God, but he put in writing his refusal to transmit to the reader. However, he gave the information of primary importance to rediscover the pronunciation he wanted to keep hidden. You can ‘read the work in fact Jewish War the following statement: “The high priest had his head decorated with a tiara of fine linen embroidered with a purple border, and surrounded by another gold crown that brought in relief the sacred letters , these are four vowels. ” This is an excellent description, for more ‘complete one made in Exodus 28:36-39. However, as we know there are no vowels in the Hebrew language, but only consonants. Unfortunately, instead of explaining this apparent oddity, some commentators (influenced by the form Yahweh) mislead readers of Josephus stating in a footnote that this reading was IAUE. It is now clear that the “sacred writings” referred to the Tetragrammaton written in paleo-Hebrew, and not in greek. For more ‘in Hebrew, these consonants Y, W, H, are specifically used as vowels, are more’ calls matres lectionis “mothers of reading”. The writings of Qumran have shown that in the first century, the Y only served to indicate vowel sounds I and E, W only served to the sounds Ô and U, while an H word was used in order for the sound A.These equivalences can be checked on thousands of words. For more ‘H was used as a voice only in terms of speech, and never inside (between vowels, however, the’ H is pronounced as a light E). So ‘to read the name YHWH as four vowels that is forcing you to read IHÔA IEÔA.

A second witness for this period regarding the pronunciation is the Talmud itself, because the Tetragrammaton is called “Shem Hamephorash” which means “the name read distinctly” or “the name read according to his letters.” Despite the fact that some Kabbalists claimed that the word “mephorash” means “hidden” is easy to check the correct meaning of this word in the Bible itself (v. 8:8, Ezra 4:18). In addition, the Talmud (Sanhedrin one hundred and first 10:1) prohibits the use of the divine name for magical purposes, and Rabbi Abba Shaul (130-160?) Adds that use biblical quotations that contain the Tetragrammaton purposes exorcism, and pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton according to his letters, as advance warning that those who transgress this command would compromise their participation in the new world. The phrase “say the Name according to its letters” means to pronounce the name as it is written, or by the sound of his letters to spell a name other than the one according to his letters.Nevertheless, there was permission to pronounce the name YHWH according to his letters (because the Talmud itself did), that is to say in Hebrew Yod, He, Waw, He (or Y, H, W, H in Italian) d ‘ On the other hand, it was forbidden to pronounce it according to these same letters.

In Hebrew, the majority of proper names spelled out in full, can ‘be read according to his letters. In the first century, people used the equivalence Y = I, W = U, and H = A at the end of the word. Also there was the alternating consonant-vowel when reading these names, except in cases of guttural sounds or H in the final, which was vocalized to . When a name is not indicated vowels, consonants are vocalized with a . This style of reading is usual in Hebrew, for example in the case of some famous name or in the case of certain names with a spelling similar to that of Tetragrammaton.


Name read










1Ch 3:5

Yrw lym

Iru Feed


Yeru alayim

Gen 29:35





Gen 25:19





Gen 25:19

s q

The s in aq


Yi s aq

Lv 26:42





2 Ch 27:1

Yrw h

Iru to


Yeru ah

Gen 46:17




Yi wah

1Ch 2:38


Ihu ‘


Yéhu ‘

Gen 3:14






It ‘easy to see in the table above the excellent agreement between the reading of these names according to the Septuagint and reading them according to their letters (in Hebrew). The reading process according to their letters is, in principle, very rudimentary, because it contains only three sounds I (Y), U (W) and A, while the Hebrew language possesses seven (the, is, [and] , is, a, o, u). Neglecting this intrinsic defect, this method of reading provides generally successful.

A third witness, always relative to this time, comes from people who had access to the priesthood, that is, by the translators of the Septuagint. This version had already set the vocalization of names just a short time before he was in the habit of using not say more ‘name outside the Temple. Now you can see that all the names that begin teoforici in YHW-() in the Hebrew Bible were voiced I-(a) in the Septuagint and always-Ia. For the name of God, which is the name for excellence theophoric (ie YHW-H), to agree with all the other names teoforici should be vocalized in Greek to me-or, if you want to recover the H silent (not exists in greek): IHÔA. Some authors such as Severino of Antioch (465-538), used the form IOA ( Iwa ) in a series of commentaries on the eighth chapter of John’s Gospel, explaining that it was the divine name in Hebrew. Another book (Praise of John the Baptizer 129:30) also made reference to the name IOA written in Greek iota, omega, alpha . In the codex Coilinianus dated 6 ° century, explains many names teoforici with the Greek word aoratos which means “invisible” ( aoraotoV is located in the LXX in Genesis 1:2) and is read IOA. The words aoratos or arretos (arrhtoV meaning “unspeakable”) are equivalent to the Latin word “ineffable”.

Paul Drach, a rabbi who converted to Catholicism, he explained ‘in his work De l’harmonie entre the Eglise et la synagogue (Harmony between church and synagogue) published in 1842, it was logical that the pronunciation Yehova, which was in agreement with the initials of all names teoforici, was the preliminary authentic, contrary to the shape of origin Samaritan Yahvé. He showed ‘the light of the criticism against the form Yehova, as an accusation of being a read error attributed to Galatino. I quote ‘Raymond Martin and Porchettus de Salvaticis to dispute the charge. Then monster ‘the delusional transformation technique of vowels a, o, in the word Adonay in and, or, because this hypothetical grammar rule (against the nature of qere / ketib) already was no longer ‘valid in the fall of the word Elohim which maintains its three vowels is, or the no need to change them and, o, i . Despite the support he had in the Vatican at the time, these explanations did not have a great effect.

In addition, this vocalization has always been considered as the most ‘correct by the Jews themselves. For example, the first Hebrew translation in French (duration 1836 to 1852) the translator jew Samuel Cahen use ‘name Iehovah in a systematic way. He defended his decision by referring to the ideas of the famous German grammarian W. Gesenius. The professor jew JH Levy explain ‘why the preferred form Y’howah, instead of Yahweh, in his article we published in 1903 in The Jewish Quarterly Review . For now you can read in the book of the Jews, with a foreword by the Chief Rabbi Joseph Sitruk French, the name (Jéhovah), written with Hebrew letters Yod, He Vav, He, is considered to be the name true of God

The problem of knowing which vowels were present with the four consonants of the Divine Name is absurd because the Masoretic vowels, which are vowel points, appeared after the year 500 of our era.Prior to that time the only vowels were the matres lectionis . In addition, the vowels and, or, not played any role in the discovery of the true pronunciation of Jewish professors Christians. On the other hand in order to justify their pronunciation of the name “according to his letters,” quoted the book of Maimonides Guide for the Perplexed very often. In addition, before 1100, the vowel points were not used with the Tetragrammaton and, or, but, for that is the voice of the Aramaic word Shema ‘which means “The Name”.


5) The most ‘ancient archaeological evidence is in favor of the ruling Jehovah

A brief transcript from the time of Amenophis III (-1391 -1353) was discovered at Soleb.

This script is easy to decipher. However, you can ‘write this sentence written in hieroglyphics with “t3 3-sw-w yh-w3-w “. This phrase is spoken in the conventional way with “ta ‘sha’suw yehua’w”, which can’ be translated as “land of the Bedouins those Yehua. ‘”


These inscriptions contain a number of words to allow for a comparison. In addition, these Bedouin Shasu usually mean for a type of Egyptian Bedouins who live with their goods (bundles) in the Sinai region of the north. Some specialists prefer to identify with a stranger Yehua place name. However, this distinction is impossible to prove, as in the case of biblical place names such as “land of Judah” (Deut. 34:2), “the land of Rameses” (Gen. 47:11), or with the list Egyptian names of places of Thutmosis III “[land of] Jacob-El”, “[the land of] Josep-El.”

In any case there is a bad habit in the vocalization of this name Yhw3, because the totality of the dictionaries indicates YHW ‘, illegible, or Yahweh, which is not in accord with the vocalization conventional, but never Yehua’. Some specialists argue rigardo the lack of knowledge of the voice of the Egyptian words, the real thing. However, for foreign words, as in this case, the Egyptians used a sort of alphabet standardized matres lectionis, ie using semi-consonants as if they were spoken. In this way we obtain the equivalences: 3 = a, w = u, y = i, and this is the precise reason why the reading with the conventional method provides acceptable results. For example, in the stele of Merneptah dated 13 ° century before our era, the name Israel is transcribed into hieroglyphics as Yÿsri3l, which you can read: Yisrial (with the conventional system), which was not to be despised. However, some specialists who reject the classic system, read this Yasarial name because of its antiquity. However, about a millennium ago, at Ebla, you can ‘read the name of the rail, which condraddice version Yasarial. So ‘with the current knowledge, the conventional reading of the hieroglyphs is the best alternative, and using this method the name (or name of place) Yhw3 is “technically read” Yehua’.

G. Gertoux – A historique du nom divine. A Nom Encens

Paris 1999 Éd. L’Harmattan ISBN 2-7384-8061-6

Nicholas of Cusa – Opera omnia. Sermo XLVIII Dies sanctificatus

Hamburg 1991 Ed Felix Meiner. Academia Litterarum heidelbergensis Tom.XVII, 2 pp.200-212

Petrus Galatinus – Opus toti chriftiane reipublice maxime useful, de Arcanis catholice ueritatis

1518 Bibliothèque Lyon La Part Dieu. 100766 Liber II pp.XLI-LVIII

Olivetanus Pierre Robert – The Bible

1535 Lyon Part Dieu de la Bibliothèque Rés.23748

Serueto Miguel – De trinitatis erroribvs

1531 Bibliothèque d’Aix en Provence Res.s.23 fol.98-101

Paulus de Heredia – Epistle Neumia filii Haccanae de Secretia

Rome 1488 Bibliothèque Nationale Française Res D-67975 fol. 1-5

Lippomanus Aloysius – Chain Exodum

1550 Paris Bibliothèque de la Part-Dieu

R. Arnaldez – De Nominum mutatione § 66

in: Les œuvres de Philon d’Alexandrie No. 18 Paris 1964 Éd. Cerf p.63

B. Couroyer – La Bible de Jerusalem

Paris 1986 Éd. Cerf p.87 notes k

10 A. Caquot – Les enigmes of a Biblical hémistiche

Paris in 1978: Dieu et l’être. Ed Études Augustiniennes CNRS p.24 Notes 23

11 JD Fowler – theophoric Personal Names in Ancient Hebrew

in: JSOT Sup No. 49 Ed Sheffield Academic Press 1988 pp.122-125

12 S. Moscati – Introduction to the Comparative Grammar of the Semitic Languages.

Wiesbaden 1980 Ed O. Harrassowitz pp.141-143

13 FM Cross – Newly Discovered Inscribed Arrowheads of the 11th Century ECB.

in: Biblical Archaeology Today 1990. 1993 Ed Jerusalem Israel Exploration Society, pp.533-542

14 P. Joüon T. Muraoka -A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew Part One

in: Subsidia biblical -14 / The Pontifical Biblical Institute in Rome, 1993 Ed § p.128 41st

15 E. Lipinski – Formes verbales dans les noms propres of Ebla et système verbal sémitique.

in: The language of Ebla. Seminar of Asian Studies XIV

1981 Ed Napoli Istituto Universitario Orientale pp.191-210

16 H. Bardwell Huffmon – Amorite Personal Names in the Mari Texts:

A structural and Lexical Study. Baltimore Ed 1965 The Johns Hopkins Press pp.64, 76.82

17 JM Durand – Documents épistolaires du palais de Mari

in: LAPO No. 16 Paris 1997 Éd. Cerf pp.292-299

18 SA Kaufman – The History of Aramaic vowel reduction.

in: Arameans, Aramaic and the Aramaic literary Tradition.

Ramat-Gan 1983 Ed Bar-Ilan University Press, pp.47-55

A. Dupont-Sommer – The cuneiform araméenne tablette de Warka

in: Revue d’Assyriologie XXXIX (1944) pp.60-61

19 J. Barr – Sémantique du langage biblique

Paris 1988 Éd. Cerf pp.1-22

20 M. Maimonides – Le guide des égarés I :61-64

Paris 1979: collection “Les Dix Paroles” Ed Verdier

21 Joachim of Fiore – Expofitio (…) in Apocalipfim

Venise 1527 Bibliothèque de la Part-Dieu Lyon SJ TH37 / 3 fol.35-37

22 L. Logs – The Book of the figures of the abbot Joachim of Fiore

And turin 1953 Societa Editrice Internazionale tom.I pp.225, 226 tom.II tav.XIa, xib

23 Innocentii papae III – Sermons de sanctis. Sermo IV, in circumcisione domains.

in: Patrologiæ Latin CCXVII Éd. JP Migne Paris 1855 pp.465-47

24 E. Hirsch SA Nolan – The Greek Grammar of Roger Bacon

Cambridge 1902 Ed E. Nolan pp.200-208

25 A. Fabre d’Olivet – Grammaire hébraïque p.19

1985 in Paris: La langue hébraïque restituée Ed L’Age d’homme p.19

26 A. Fabre d’Olivet – Grammaire hébraïque p.19 / Cosmogonie de Moïse pp.28 0.67 to 71

in: La langue hébraïque restituée. 1985 Ed L’Age d’homme

27 J. Hallévi – The Kuzari, apologies méprisée de la religion (IV :1-16)

Paris 1993: collection “Les Dix Paroles” Ed Verdier pp.147-169

28 Flavius Josephe – La guerre des Juifs (V, 438) Tome III

Ed 1982 Les Belles Lettres p.172

29 Flavius Josephe -Les Antiquités Juives (II, 275) or (II, 12.4)

1992 Ed Cerf p.130

30 Flavius Josephe -La guerre des Juifs (V, 235) Tome III

Ed 1982 Les Belles Lettres p.142

31 FI Andersen AD Forbes – Spelling in the Hebrew Bible

in: Orientalia 41 Biblical Biblical Institute Press, Rome 1986 Ed p.92

32 J. du Verdier – Nova methodus hebraica punctis masoreticis expurgata

in: Linguae Hebraicæ Éd Paris, 1847. JP Migne pp.883-890

33 Balthafar Corderius – Chain Petrvm Græcorvm in Sanctvm Ioannem

Parisii 1630 Bibliothèque des Sources Chrétiennes Lyon p.244

34 Codex Coilinanus Paris Bibliothèque Nationale Coislin Gr 1 fol. 1-4

35 PLB Drach – De l’harmonie entre the Eglise et la synagogue

1978 Belgium Ed socii Sancti Michaelis pp.370 0.473 to 498

36 JH Levy – The Tetra (?) grammaton

in: The Jewish Quarterly Review Vol.XV (1903) 1966 Ed Ktav Publishing House, pp.97-99

37 AJ Kolatch -Le livre du pourquoi juif

Geneva 1990 Éd. MJR pp.IX, 347

38 J. Leclant – Les fouilles de Soleb

in: Annuaire du Collège de France 1980-1981 pp.474-475

J. Leclant – Les fouilles de Soleb

in: Nachrichten der Akademie der Wissenscaften in Göttingen I 1965 pp.205-216

39 J. Leclant – The “Tétragramme” à l’époque of Amenophis III

in: Near Eastern Studies. Wiesbaden 1991 Ed Otto Harrassowitz pp.215-219

MC Astour – Yahweh in Egyptian Topographic Lists

Bamberg in 1979: Festschrift Elmar Edel pp.17-32

40 JB Pritchard – Ancient Near Eastern Texts

Princeton Princeton University Press 1969 Ed p.242

41 WA Ward – A New Look at Semitic Personal Names and loanwords in Egyptian.

in: Chronique d’Égypte LXXI (1996) # 141
Ed Égyptologique Fondation Reine Elisabeth Brussels pp.17-47